Kentucky Mast Report 2020 2020 Mast Survey Report Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources White oak (Quercus alba), a vital food source for wildlife. Photo: KDFWR. Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources Page 1 Kentucky Mast Report 2020 Contents Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................ 3 Our Agency .......................................................................................................................................................... 3 Importance of Mast to Wildlife ........................................................................................................................... 3 Monitoring Mast Production: KDFWR’s Mast Survey ............................................................................................. 4 Past Method ........................................................................................................................................................ 4 Figure 1. Old survey card method for mast assessment across Kentucky 1982 – 2007. ................................ 4 Figure 2a: Mast Survey results, 1982-2006. .................................................................................................... 5 Figure 2b: Mast Survey results by species group, 1982-2006. ........................................................................ 5 Current Method .................................................................................................................................................. 6 Figure 3. White oak mast survey locations for the regional mast survey consortium, 2016. ........................ 6 Surveyors ............................................................................................................................................................. 6 Mast Survey Results and Discussion ....................................................................................................................... 7 Table 1. Mast survey results, statewide and regionally, 2020. ....................................................................... 8 Table 2. Mast survey results by survey site, 2020. .......................................................................................... 9 Figure 4: Mast Survey sites, 2020. ................................................................................................................. 10 Figure 5: Percentage of trees bearing mast (PBA), 2020. ............................................................................. 10 Figure 6. Variation in percentage of trees bearing mast (PBA), 2020. .......................................................... 11 Figure 7: Trends in percentage of trees bearing mast (PBA) by species group, 2007-2020. ........................ 12 Figure 8. Percentage of tree crown area bearing mast (PCA), 2020. ............................................................ 13 Figure 9. Relationship of PCA and PBA, 2020. ............................................................................................... 14 Figure 10. Percentage of tree crown area bearing mast (PCA) by site, 2020. .............................................. 15 Figure 11. Variation in percentage of tree crown bearing mast (PCA), 2020. .............................................. 16 Closing ................................................................................................................................................................... 17 Acknowledgments................................................................................................................................................. 17 Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources Page 2 Kentucky Mast Report 2020 Introduction Our Agency The Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources (KDFWR) is an agency of the Kentucky Tourism, Arts & Heritage Cabinet. KDFWR is overseen by a commission of members nominated by Kentucky’s sportsmen and women from 9 districts across the state and appointed by the Governor. KDFWR employs about 400 full-time staff, including conservation officers, wildlife and fisheries biologists, conservation educators, and specialists in information technology, public relations, and administrative services. KDFWR receives no money from the state’s General Fund; rather, the agency is funded through the sale of hunting and fishing licenses, boating registration fees, and federal grants based on the number of hunting and fishing licenses sold in the state. KDFWR’s Wildlife Division is responsible for the conservation and management of wildlife populations in the state to provide opportunity for hunting and viewing wildlife. Each year, KDFWR staff and partners from other agencies, universities, and non-governmental organizations conduct a mast survey in an effort to summarize mast conditions and shed light on population and harvest trends of various wildlife species. The Grouse & Turkey Program and Small Game Program coordinate the survey and prepared this report of survey findings. Importance of Mast to Wildlife Mast refers to the fruit of woody vegetation, many types of which provide important foods for wildlife. “Hard mast” includes acorns, hickory nuts, beechnuts, walnuts, and hazelnuts, all of which are available to wildlife beginning in late summer through fall and winter. “Soft mast” includes the many types of soft fruits produced from late spring through the summer and early fall, such as serviceberries, wild plums, wild grapes, dogwood berries, and persimmons. Both hard and soft mast are important for Kentucky’s wildlife throughout the year, but fall and winter hard mast production is of primary concern for wildlife managers because of the great influence this food resource exerts on the movements, body condition, and thus population dynamics of many forest-dwelling wildlife species. Thus, the KDFWR Mast Survey focuses on surveying oak, hickory, and American beech trees. Deer, bears, wild turkeys, ruffed grouse, squirrels, small mammals, and other species depend on nutritious hard mast to bulk up before winter and for sustenance during winter when few other foods are available. Research has shown that in years when acorn crops are large enough to be available in March and April, female ruffed grouse enter the nesting season in better condition. The same may be true for other species. Animal movement in fall and winter is related to the availability of high-energy hard mast foods. In years when little to no mast is available from oaks, hickories, or beech trees, wildlife may move more often and/or greater distances in search of limited food supplies. Higher rates of movement may lead to more encounters with wildlife, some positive (deer and turkeys using fields to a greater degree in search of waste grains) and some negative (bear nuisance activity may be higher). Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources Page 3 Kentucky Mast Report 2020 Mast production may be highly variable year to year, especially among the many oak species in our forests. Harsh spring weather may hinder flowering and pollination, reducing the fall mast crop. However, weather does not explain all the variability in mast production and all factors influencing a given year’s mast crop are unknown. Variability in production is buffered to some degree by having different hard mast species present in a forest stand, and most forests in Kentucky have multiple oak and hickory species. Some have walnuts and beech, as well. Monitoring Mast Production: KDFWR’s Mast Survey Since 1982, KDFWR has conducted a statewide mast production survey of important producers of wildlife foods. The KDFWR Mast Survey evaluates 4 broad groups of trees of importance to Kentucky wildlife: red oaks, white oaks, hickories, and beech. By monitoring mast production annually, we can detect trends in wildlife food availability in our forests any given year. We may also compare these metrics to the number of animals harvested or observed in a given year to determine the relationship between mast and wildlife. Past Method Beginning in 1982 the Mast Survey took the form of a survey card sent out to area biologists for completion on 3 separate areas in their respective regions. The survey card had 4 categories for each tree and shrub group: Heavy, Moderate, Light, and None. These subjective categories reflected the surveyor’s personal evaluation of the amount of hard or soft mast occurring on each group of trees and shrubs in September and October (Figure 1). The trends observed from these data cannot be assimilated in the current survey method, but are valuable metrics in a historical context (Figure 2). Figure 1. Old survey card method for mast assessment across Kentucky 1982 – 2007. Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources Page 4 Kentucky Mast Report 2020 Overall Mast Production in Kentucky, 1982-2006 3.0 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 Rating Value 0.5 0.0 Annual Rating Long-Term Average Rating Figure 2a: Mast Survey results, 1982-2006. Ratings are mast production index values averaged annually across all trees surveyed. Species survey included various white oak, red oak, and hickory species, American beech, black walnut, and flowering dogwood. Mast Production by Species, 1982-2006 3.5 3.0 2.5 2.0 1.5 Rating Value 1.0 0.5 0.0 White Oaks Red Oaks Hickories American Beech Figure 2b: Mast Survey results by species group, 1982-2006. Ratings are mast production index values averaged annually across